Dan Sullivan

Senator Sullivan, Senator Murkowski, as always, I sincerely appreciate your leadership on these issues.

We must act to ensure that elephant ivory is not somehow considered to be synonymous with walrus ivory, and protect our hunters and artisans from being targeted for carrying on a sustainable and culturally and economically valuable…

Walruses are not listed as endangered or threatened under the Endangered Species Act

I'm very honored to be holding an official U.S. Senate hearing at AFN, and very honored to have so many friends and colleagues.

I've called this hearing to raise awareness of the impacts of broadly written State ivory bans

I believe that there is need for Congress to have Federal legislation in this area.

You've had the minority leader of the United States Senate filibuster the defense appropriations bills, not three times, as my colleagues have said--six times in the last year and a half year.

If the Service Chiefs are each saying we face high military risk, how can we not be supportive of additional military spending?

The American people support more military spending.

I thought that was remarkable. I don't know if that's ever happened, Mr. Chairman, before this committee before.

I believe that just in terms of pure fairness, taking care of our veterans, that this is a critical, critical provision that, hopefully, every member of this Committee and every member of Congress can agree on.

All this bill is trying to do is to give people who were serving their country... the opportunity to finally apply for the Native allotment that was rightfully theirs.

This bill would help the country and it would also help some of Alaska's most remarkable and courageous citizens.

Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to discuss several bills which are critically important to Alaska's future.

I would have to disagree. In my experience, I have yet to find a scenario where additional layers of bureaucracy and requirements from a Federal action agency have increased the efficiency and reduced time and delays and costs related to a…

That is not no net gain. That is not no net loss.

It doesn't have discretion to make new policy when the policy is stated in the law.

That is a pretty major statutory policy call, isn't it?

I don't believe that is laid out in any statute, any statute by which you get your authority, and that is a policy call that should be made by the Congress of the United States, not by a Federal agency that doesn't have that authority.

Why do you think the Corps submitted these comments? It is pretty extraordinary, right?

This is a major policy call that you are usurping the authority of the Congress on this issue.

Only Congress does that, sir.

I mean, this is the sound of the economic decline of the country, in my view.

Mitigation under the ESA is very different.

I want the statute, and I want the language in the statute that says it is the policy of the United States to have no net gain or no net loss.